• Happy holidays, folks! Thanks to each and every one of you for being part of the Tom's Hardware community!

Haswell CPUs to Top Out at 3.5 GHz

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]hrmes[/nom]As Bill would say, 4 cores should be enough for everyone...[/citation]
It isn't about looking at the "now", it's about looking at the "future".
Do you want them to purposely stagnate the market?

Better performance is always welcome, better multitasking is always required in the future.
 
[citation][nom]myromance123[/nom]It isn't about looking at the "now", it's about looking at the "future".Do you want them to purposely stagnate the market?Better performance is always welcome, better multitasking is always required in the future.[/citation]
I should have added "(sarcasm)" at the end of my comment.
 
My i5-3570 is still in the mail. Currently in NJ according to my tracking number. From Core2Quad to i5. Waited so long because I didn't want to buy new ram and new motherboard. Welp.......... Didn't even receive it yet and I'm outdated. Couldn't they have at least waited until tonight to give me the news, I would have liked 5 minutes of knowing I have the latest socket.
 
I'm confused/surprised by all the people NOT expecting a socket change, that's always been one of the features of the tick-tock model, after all. Two years with the same socket, then they change.

For everyone stuck on LGA 775, it's going to be a HUGE upgrade, currently my Core 2 Quad Q8400's getting outperformed by an SB/IB Pentium in most games, it seems.

For the rest it's not going to be much of a upgrade in terms of absolute performance, as indicated by the SB->IB transition.

You'll get 22nm 6-cores and 8-cores in the form of IB-E and Xeon, can't see it being of much use in desktops for at least the next 3-4 years. IF 6-core CPUs are to be mainstream before 2016, that'll only happen (as far as i can see) when Intel's successfully dominated ARM, because they'll have nothing to do then. They chased AMD's cores with cores+HT+IPC , now they're going after ARM with IPC and efficiency, and they're not going to stop until they're done OR AMD GETS STEAMROLLER RIGHT. Then they'll run after cores again. Point is, for now, they don't need to. The only people really using quad-cores (or more) at the moment are probably people running games, workstations, supercomputers, servers and multi-threaded stuff, and the majority aren't doing anything with more than two (seriously, what does a quad-core smartphone do better for the average person than a dual core one?) cores.

[citation][nom]Teramedia[/nom]I'm scratching my head over the increased TDP on the 4770K too. Unless the iGPU uses 7W more because it's a 4600 instead of a 4000, it makes no sense.[/citation]
I don't think so, they all use the same IGP irrespective of power consumption, and the same clock rates. They're still managing to maintain the same/higher x86 core/clock count as previous generation CPUs for a given TDP. BTW it's 84w on ALL "standard power" CPUs, not just the 4770K.
 
[citation][nom]mad tech[/nom]Release it already i am w8ing to upgrade from crappy core2duo[/citation]
why wait? Haswell and Broadwell are both centered around better !/W for mobile applications, and better integrated graphics on the desktop end. The only reason to wait is if you are looking at getting an x86 tablet, or a desktop without GPU. Otherwise go with a Sandy or Ivy Bridge CPU, it will last you a good long time for most workloads.
 
[citation][nom]CaedenV[/nom]why wait? Haswell and Broadwell are both centered around better !/W for mobile applications, and better integrated graphics on the desktop end. The only reason to wait is if you are looking at getting an x86 tablet, or a desktop without GPU. Otherwise go with a Sandy or Ivy Bridge CPU, it will last you a good long time for most workloads.[/citation]

Yep. If you want to overclock. Sandy is still the best option!
 
Oh great higher iGPU performance. I'm sure that was at the top of everyone's list.
 
I am still rocking a Core 2 Quad 6600 at stock and even as a gamer, I see no compelling reason for me to upgrade. I don't edit much video, I don't encode video/audio. I just play the occasional 3d game and browse a bunch of web sites on my 1900x1200 LCD with a 6950 and 8GB of DDR2...

The SSD has made the CPU upgrade a low priority upgrade...
 
I have an old Q8300 with an AMD 5750, will any of these cpu's with IGP, be better at games than my setup? if i were to get an i5-4670 with 8GB and keep the 5750 would that not be best bet?
 

The SB -> IB transition was a die shrink or "tick", Haswell is a new architecture or "tock". This is supposed to yield a greater performance boost than a tick. Just look at what a success SB was in its day.

I don't expect quite that big of an improvement in x86 performance though, since they're focusing more on the IGP. Should still be a decent step forward though, unless they're trying to give AMD a reprieve or something.
 
I'm sticking with Sandy Bridge for a while. Intel's newer processors just increase IGP performance and CPU power efficiency, which is great for laptops, but I could really care less in a gaming system.
 
SB yielded biggest performance boost from architecture modifications compared to its predecessors.
IB got less than 5% boost because of the die shrink.
Haswell won't be featuring large boosts in architecture like SB did... biggest change will be in the IGP, the rest will be secondary.

All in all, Intel is essentially milking outdated technologies as it is.
Synthetic diamonds and carbon-nanotubes were viable for usage in electronics in mid 90-ies.
Graphene since late 2008 with its band-gap problem solved.

But of course, Intel won't be rushing with those kinds of materials if they can milk outdated ones for all they are worth... releasing same tech over and over again with minor revisions - and of course, not giving us the best of what current materials are capable of, instead doing it in increments (its a slow as heck process).
 
I thought I was going to see some crazy low watt numbers! That would've made us AMDers even more bummed. Looks like they went to improve their IGPU. It will be interesting to see how performance is. 14nm is pushing Moore's Law (I have no idea..... I'm just trying to seem smart now).
 

If Haswell improves power efficiency, these CPUs will have improved performance. Using the same (or actually slightly more) power at higher power efficiency means you're getting more performance.
 
AMD can kill Intel in the gaming industry, if they play there cards right. (wich is a tall order for AMD, they can screw up a one car funeral.) Go the oposite direction as Intel; 200W TDP Quad core cpu. for 200 bucks, unlocked, a GOOD stock cooler (one you can OC on...) and will kick the ship out of curent i5's. better yet; put in an LGA 1155 socket! all the intel fanboys (me included) will switch in an instant.
Lets just hope AMD is watching this thread...

(Edit)
Want an example of amd screwing up? FX series. all of it.
FX-4000: worse than an IB i3, with twice the cores and twice the power
FX-6000: congrats, you made a 150 dollar cpu that fits in the niche between the $130 fx 4000 and the $180 fx 8000... about the same as an IB i3, costs more and uses more power. GG.
FX-8000: this one is not bad for the price, if using for multi thread programs, or rendering videos. but from a gaming standpoint, you just have 4 idle cores sucking power and making heat... and coming in at 180 bucks, its too close to an i5 2400, witch is beter an uses less power, to even consider buying.

this is not a smear AMD post, but you gotta think, how can they screw up this much?!?!?!?
 
Haswell has all those improvements for multicore programming built in. It has some other architectural improvements that will make its IPC better as well. It won't be a huge deal better in IPC, but it will certainly be better. It will be easier to program for as well. I know, who cares about iGPU. Well, since most things are going mobile, the iGPU will be a pretty big deal. All in one's also will like this CPU. Micro$osft is trying to kill the desktop with its crappy Windows 8. Intel is just playing to the market.
 
[citation][nom]deksman[/nom]All in all, Intel is essentially milking outdated technologies as it is.Synthetic diamonds and carbon-nanotubes were viable for usage in electronics in mid 90-ies.Graphene since late 2008 with its band-gap problem solved.But of course, Intel won't be rushing with those kinds of materials if they can milk outdated ones for all they are worth...[/citation]
Technology to assemble nanotubes into working ICs has barely passed the proof-of-concept stage. Methods of doing it in a cost-effective large-scale fashion are still work-in-progress.

Most of the reasons behind research in using graphene and diamond as new types of substrates were driven by the exponential growth in TDPs 10 years ago where AMD/Intel were contemplating future CPUs in the 200-300W range. Now that performance-per-watt has become an industry-wide obsession and future desktop chips much beyond 100W have become highly unlikely (almost already history in Intel's case), research in enabling extreme TDPs for mass-manufactured ICs has gone to back-burners.

Even if IC manufacturers could implement nanotubes and graphene substrate overnight, they would still run into switching speed limits from the simple physics of propagation delays, capacitive loading, gate switching times, combinational logic delays, setup/hold times on DFFs, parasitic conductance, leakage, etc. so carbon-based versions of today's ICs would not necessarily be any faster at least for a given TDP budget.

The reasons why everything has been stalling at ~3.5GHz is that CPU designers are hitting practical physical limits and just about every performance enhancement trick has already been discovered so there isn't much else to be done other than go parallel. The problem with more cores is that still very little software makes significant use of more than one core a whole decade after the first multi-core/multi-threaded desktop CPUs got introduced.

Another problem with going more parallel than necessary is that the extra arbitration logic between cores will add latency and complexity that can itself become a bottleneck for lightly threaded software such as most games and desktop applications.
 
@deksman: Since making a CPU out of graphene, carbon nanotubes and/or diamonds is so technologically superior while being non-challenging for you, please go put together a business plan, find some financial backers, develop your chips and corner the market. If it's as superior and as easy as you say, you should have no trouble at all. I look forward to buying your superior-performing CPU products!

Or, stop your incessant anti-"establishment" whining on multiple threads. I'm tired of it. Go get a job in the CPU industry and find out how "easy" IC fab R&D actually is.

As for Haswell, I'm not encouraged by the higher TDP and modest clock rates. I know these are primarily targeting the mobile (cell phone -- laptop) market, but it doesn't seem like Intel did as much as they did with e.g. Core 2 or Sandy Bridge.
 
[citation][nom]jacobdrj[/nom]I am still rocking a Core 2 Quad 6600 at stock and even as a gamer, I see no compelling reason for me to upgrade. I don't edit much video, I don't encode video/audio. I just play the occasional 3d game and browse a bunch of web sites on my 1900x1200 LCD with a 6950 and 8GB of DDR2...The SSD has made the CPU upgrade a low priority upgrade...[/citation]
Try to overclock it without raising voltage if you have a half decent P35 motherboard. 3ghz can be achieved on stock voltage (1,25V Vdrop), even with B3 steppings.
 
I'll hold on to my Core2 Quad until DDR4 on desktops is mainstream. It handles the majority of what I throw at it, but I'm not buying a new mobo + cpu + ram unless this is a massive upgrade for all of them.
 
Its interesting they haven't mentioned anything about the 'extreme' line processors rather like the LGA2011 socket is currently. Perhaps that will come later as Ivy Bridge hasn't yet reached that socket.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom